Re: Meeting rotation (was Hotel situation)
2015-12-19 08:18:17
+1
Vancouver or anywhere in Canada Forever. I appreciate the problem with US
visas. Though I must say most of us believed the Minneapolis Hilton actually
had the optimal lay out of meeting rooms and no management type one ever
believed it was a junket. Berlin or Prague on the short list as well.
I’ve already made my decision NOT to go to Buenos Aries.
On 12/18/15, 4:31 PM, "ietf on behalf of Fred Baker (fred)"
<ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org on behalf of fred(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com> wrote:
Let me ask a question. I'm on the IAOC Meetings committee, which is an
advisory committee that does some research (with AMS) and makes a
recommendation to Ray, which he then takes to the IAOC. The IAOC sometimes
agrees with us and sometimes doesn't. You will have just seen a note from Ray
on this mailer detailing the IAOC's objectives in meeting planning; our
committee, with strong involvement from AMS, does the investigative legwork to
try to achieve those.
Right now, I am suggesting a model to Ray, based on a proposal that we have
seen that would build a multi-meeting contract with a certain hotel. As with
most business, matters, it would be inappropriate for me to discuss a contract
below a certain level of detail. But in general terms, this proposal comes
from a hotel that we have met in multiple times, had successful meetings, and
as far as we know have met the objectives Ray outlined. We have list of places
we have met in in which that wasn't true for one reason or another; we also
have a set of locations that have worked better than the average, and done so
on multiple occasions. Some of these are in Asia, some are in Europe, and some
are in North America. Of probable interest to you: one of the sites I think
mostly works is in Prague.
What I am suggesting to the IAOC is that, over the coming 9 years (27
meetings), we meet 9 times in Asia (and maybe that includes ANZ), 9 times in
Europe (and maybe that includes Africa), and 9 times in the Americas. Of
those, I am suggesting that we meet 3 of the 9 Asian times in a particular
hotel that has worked well for us in that part of the world, 6 of the 9
European times in two hotels that have worked well for us in Europe, and in 9
of the 9 "Americas" times, meet in 3 hotels that have worked well for us in
the past in the US and Canada. Our world tour would begin to have aspects of a
rotation. For that to happen, I am suggesting that we ask these specific
locations whether they, too, would be interested in a multi-meeting contract,
and to propose terms for such meetings.
Folks from Latin America (e.g., South and Central, generally spanish-speaking
and portuguese-speaking) will object on the grounds that they would like to be
included in the rotation. I can respond to that in a couple of ways, one of
which is that I honestly don't expect to get proposals for 3 meetings in 9
years from each of the 3 North American hotels on my little list. Also, we can
probably expect a little flexibility in contracting that would allow us to
insert a Latin American location by moving one of the venues out a little bit.
I think the problem is solvable.
What this does is give us a set of locations, for as many as 18 of the coming
27 meetings, that we know work for the IETF and its purposes, because they
have in the past. It also gives us at least 9 of the coming 27 meetings in
which we can explore locations such as you advocate.
What will be the problems with placing those meetings? North America is
frankly not too hard. Europe takes a little more effort, especially in finding
a suitable host. Asia/ANZ - we put a lot of effort into that. The locations
that can offer us the number of bedrooms and breakout rooms we need, can
honestly discuss having 1500 people walk out of a meeting at 11:30 and return
by 13:00, and are near major hub or regional airports in Asia is a little
thin, and where we find them, they are expensive.
Let me ask, since you clearly have opinions on such matters - what would you
think of such an arrangement? What am I missing in such a proposal?
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- Re: Cross-area review (was Meeting rotation), (continued)
- RE: Cross-area review (was Meeting rotation), Ted Lemon
- Re: Cross-area review (was Meeting rotation), Brian E Carpenter
- RE: Cross-area review (was Meeting rotation), Ted Lemon
- Independent Stream (was Re: Cross-area review (was Meeting rotation)), Dave Crocker
- Re: Cross-area review (was Meeting rotation), Jari Arkko
- Re: Cross-area review (was Meeting rotation), Jari Arkko
- Re: Cross-area review (was Meeting rotation), tom p.
- Re: Cross-area review (was Meeting rotation), Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Meeting rotation (was Hotel situation),
Richard Shockey <=
- Re: Meeting rotation (was Hotel situation), tom p.
- Re: Meeting rotation (was Hotel situation), Jari Arkko
- Re: Meeting rotation (was Hotel situation), John Levine
- Re: Meeting rotation (was Hotel situation), Stephen Farrell
- Re: Meeting rotation (was Hotel situation), John C Klensin
- Re: Hotel situation, Toerless Eckert
- Re: Hotel situation, Warren Kumari
- RE: Hotel situation, Pat (Patricia) Thaler
- InterContinental BA experience so far (was: Re: Hotel situation), Marco Davids
- Re: InterContinental BA experience so far (was: Re: Hotel situation), John Levine
|
|
|